Important question for 20th Century Type Set users

[DWLange]

Presently, there are registry sets for a 20th Century type set that is either all proofs or all non-proofs. I would like to create one that allows for either proofs or non-proofs for each type.

 

The options I have are to eliminate the two existing sets and have just the mixed set or to keep all three. Which option would those of you having type sets already registered or who are planning to register type sets prefer? Please limit your answers to the two options described.

[bartdog-migration]

I like the option to retain the existing set, and add the two additional sets.

 

Bill

 

 

[CarlWohlforth]

I think there are already two sets, circulating strike is one and proof only is the other. I currently have a proof set.

 

Personally I'd like to see just the mixed set. It seems more fun when everybody is working on the same set. I guess I could have said it seems more competitive too.

 

If we went with one mixed set we would have a lot of fun arguing, er, debating about which should be worth more points, the type in MSxx vs PFxx DCAM.

 

[keithdagen]

I would prefer to keep the existing sets and add a third, but if the consensus is to combine down to a single set, I will support that decision as well.

[CarlWohlforth]

If the consensus is to have three sets I'll be happy to support that decision too!

 

I remember Keith has an awesome set of MS moderns, but my DCAM proofs (69 DCAM is much easier than MS 67 of most moderns) were an unfair advantage. That was in an unweighted set.

 

I would imagine with the weighting here some tough MS coins in less than 69 would top PF 69 Ultras... But I'd choose the Ultras anyway. I'd like to comare a mostly proof set with a mostly MS set to see how things shake out.

[keithdagen]

Carl,

 

NGC adjusted the weights on the USA Type Set for the post-1964 coins in a way that the MS and PR pieces of that era could FAIRLY compete.

 

Alas, I sold many of my better MS pieces to get ready to buy a house. There are a few other guys who will be able to benefit though, and I'll be back in the game soon, just focusing on those pre-1964 coins a bit more.

[Oldtrader3]

The 20th Century Set has gold coins in it. I would not favor losing these gold coins in a set consolidation. Plus that, there is another "Gold Type Set" that has all the gold type coins from 1834 to 1933. I am very interested in what you would suggest to do with these sets in a consolidation?

 

I put a good deal of time into building these sets and would not favor losing the gold coins in a consolidation. I would, for these reasons, favor adding additional sets.

[prooflike]

I would like to see seperate MS and PR sets remain and a third MS/PR set added if there is enough interest but weighted accordingly (somebody mentioned the point in some series a PR69DCAM is much easier & cheaper than MS67's).

[Oldtrader3]

Keith: Just be glad that you are not buying here, in this part of California. I am buying a house, also. The cost here is about $300 a square foot! Needless to say, I bought the smallest new house that I can find in a decent area. I have heard that Real Estate is much less expensive, house for house, in Texas than in California.